On 2015-05-29 13:14:18 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Abhijit Menon-Sen <a...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > As I mentioned yesterday, I'm not really on board with ignoring EACCES, > except for the directories-on-Windows case. Since we're only logging > the failures anyway, I think it is reasonable to log a complaint for any > unwritable file in the data directory.
That sounds like a potentially nontrivial amount of repetitive log bleat after every crash start? One which the user can't really stop? > Also I want to get rid of the ETXTBSY special cases. That one doesn't > seem like something that we should silently ignore: what the heck are > executables doing in the data directory? Or is there some other meaning > on Windows? I've seen a bunch of binaries placed in the data directory as archive/restore commands. Those will be busy a good amount of the time. While it'd not be my choice to do that, it's not entirely unreasonable. Andres -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
